Charles Krauthammer says it right up front in his Washington Post column: “I’m not a global warming believer. I’m not a global warming denier.”

He does, however, challenge the notion that the science on climate change is settled and says those who insist otherwise are engaged in “a crude attempt to silence critics and delegitimize debate.”

How ironic, then, that some environmental activists launched a petition urging the Post not to publish Krauthammer’s column on Friday.

Their response to opinions they disagree with is to suppress the speech.

Brad Johnson (@ClimateBrad), the editor of HillHeat.com and a former Think Progress staffer, boasted on Twitter that 110,000 people had urged the newspaper “to stop publishing climate lies” like the Krauthammer piece.

I understand that many people are passionate about global warming and consider skeptics to be flat-earthers. Those who don’t like the arguments by Krauthammer, a Fox News contributor, should by all means criticize, dispute, denounce and otherwise go at him. That’s how debate takes place in a country with a vibrant media culture.

Instead, these folks believe that censorship is preferable. Why engage Krauthammer when they might just be able to employ pressure tactics to silence him? And what’s the difference between this and shouting down a speaker at a town hall?

Krauthammer told me the petition-signers “showed up just in time to make precisely the point I made in the column.”

When it comes to free speech, he says, “they don’t even hide it anymore. Now they proudly want certain arguments banished from discourse. The next step is book burning. So the question of the day is: Can you light a Kindle?

“Is there anything more anti-scientific than scientific truths being determined by petition and demonstration?”

Maybe this reflects a broader trend in which people want to wall themselves off from contrary information — and wall off others as well. Debating a complicated subject like climate change — and, equally important, what to do about it — is difficult. Attempting to silence the other side is the easy way out.

Of course, most climate-change proponents are perfectly willing to argue their case on the merits. Unfortunately, that doesn’t apply to everyone.

I am not generally a fan of The Weekly Standard but that has more to do with its FP. Here's is something on Professor of Meteorology Richard Lindzen:

Granted, Lindzen is no shrinking violet. A pioneering climate scientist with decades at Harvard and MIT, Lindzen sees his discipline as being deeply compromised by political pressure, data fudging, out-and-out guesswork, and wholly unwarranted alarmism. In a shot across the bow of what many insist is indisputable scientific truth, Lindzen characterizes global warming as “small and . . . nothing to be alarmed about.” In the climate debate—on which hinge far-reaching questions of public policy—them’s fightin’ words....

But Lindzen rejects the dire projections. For one thing, he says that the Summary for Policymakers is an inherently problematic document. The IPCC report itself, weighing in at thousands of pages, is “not terrible. It’s not unbiased, but the bias [is] more or less to limit your criticism of models,” he says. The Summary for Policymakers, on the other hand—the only part of the report that the media and the politicians pay any attention to—“rips out doubts to a large extent. . . . [Furthermore], government representatives have the final say on the summary.” Thus, while the full IPPC report demonstrates a significant amount of doubt among scientists, the essentially political Summary for Policymakers filters it out.

There was a thread where I counted up how many were actual scientists attended the ICC--not many.

Whenever, I see a headline on GW alarmist with the generality "Scientists" say.....I look for who it is. Most of the time it's activists being cited with maybe one scientist--sometimes none just the activists using the plural form of scientist.

Last week saw a news clip of Kerry naming issues that crossed borders and he mentioned global warming. Like all the left's past collectivism--globalism is it's latest application.

__________________My Message to President-Elect Donald Trump:America did NOT became great because of what government did. America became great because of what the U.S. Constitution prevented our government from doing. The people made America great.

My point is that politicians are the ones proposing solutions right now. Scientists are not. And the only realistic solutions put forth involve emissions reductions, taxes, penalties, and other money making political ventures.

If you just listen to actual scientists and ignore idiot politicians, you'll find that we're still searching for real solutions and politicians are just looking for income from something they don't understand. Gypsy woman doesn't understand the difference.

Yeah, but those politicians are ignoring what many scientists are saying. They are taking information out of reports to frame the issue for political purposes.

__________________My Message to President-Elect Donald Trump:America did NOT became great because of what government did. America became great because of what the U.S. Constitution prevented our government from doing. The people made America great.

Calling people uneducated enough to understand is censorship, particularly when some of them are a doctor like Krauthammer.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HonestChieffan

Krauthammer may be a bit better educated than you give him credit for.

I have as many years education as Krauthammer, but you'd be a fool to come to me for psychiatric or other medical advice. Specialization matters.

Krauthammer obviously has considerable intellectual horsepower, but he brought none of it to his Washington Post piece. It was just a collection of rehashed denier claims that were misleading, disproven, or flat out false.

I have as many years education as Krauthammer, but you'd be a fool to come to me for psychiatric or other medical advice. Specialization matters.

Krauthammer obviously has considerable intellectual horsepower, but he brought none of it to his Washington Post piece. It was just a collection of rehashed denier claims that were misleading, disproven, or flat out false.

The science of global warming is not that difficult for men of higher education or in other sciences to understand. So men like Krauthammer can know if they want to read about it. The Oregon Petition Institute shows this as well.Not all the scientists on that were climatologists, but a mix of disciplines, but they could understand climate science well enough. They had some excellent charts and graph and bring up points the GW Alarmists ignore.

In fact, one night I had a friend who is trained in science help me type posts in response to TipTap who pointed out some things he was wrong about. He was really the one communicating though. Tip did acknowledge some of the points. But it was basic science. It's here somewhere from about 5 years ago. I was trying to look for it earlier today but had to go.

You guys are just trying to pull authoritarian altitude over others, while ignoring the political solutions being demanded.

__________________My Message to President-Elect Donald Trump:America did NOT became great because of what government did. America became great because of what the U.S. Constitution prevented our government from doing. The people made America great.

The earth's climate doesn't change depending on who is in the white house or what the congressional representative from the 3rd district in Florida thinks. Politics are inconsequential to whether climate change is occurring and what its causes are.

If you disagree, please elaborate on the politics of the Higgs Boson particle.

The earth's climate doesn't change depending on who is in the white house or what the congressional representative from the 3rd district in Florida thinks. Politics are inconsequential to whether climate change is occurring and what its causes are.

If you typed that then I can only say "WHOOSH! It went over your head."

__________________My Message to President-Elect Donald Trump:America did NOT became great because of what government did. America became great because of what the U.S. Constitution prevented our government from doing. The people made America great.

I meant the IPCC and those who attended. There was something about the final reports that was fishy for lack of a better word that I posted in one of those threads but I can't recall the details.

I have found this though: *raises eyebrows*

Sept 18, 2013

On Tuesday, a group of 50 international scientists released a comprehensive new report on the science of climate change that concluded that evidence now leans against global warming resulting from human-related greenhouse gas emissions.
The report, which cites thousands of peer-reviewed articles the United Nations-sponsored panel on climate change ignored, also found that "no empirical evidence exists to substantiate the claim that 2°C of warming presents a threat to planetary ecologies or environments" and no convincing case can be made that "a warming will be more economically costly than an equivalent cooling." The U.N.'s panel is scheduled to release its next report next month.

The Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change, or NIPCC, which produced the report, is described as "an international panel of scientists and scholars who came together to understand the causes and consequences of climate change." Unlike the "United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which is government-sponsored, politically motivated, and predisposed to believing that climate change is a problem in need of a U.N. solution," NIPCC "has no formal attachment to or sponsorship from any government or governmental agency" and is "wholly independent of political pressures and influences and therefore is not predisposed to produce politically motivated conclusions or policy recommendations."http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Governm...Global-Warming

Now this is what I was referring to when I mentioned the politics behind it. Not the actual science but that this is in need of a UN solution....likely for more global governance that will erode US sovereignty and socialism aka hardship.

__________________My Message to President-Elect Donald Trump:America did NOT became great because of what government did. America became great because of what the U.S. Constitution prevented our government from doing. The people made America great.

I don't want to get into a pateeu-type semantics debate, but "censorship" and raising "free speech" issues generally imply a govt suppression of speech, which obviously isn't the case here.

The Washington Post certainly has a right to "censor" its own content, and what happened here was people asking the WP not to publish what they think is false information.

If people telling a newspaper it shouldn't publish something false is suppressing free speech what is telling those people that they shouldn't make the request? Howard Kurtz, Fox, and Charles Krauthammer hate free speech!

So you see, there is no consensus among scientists even. That's just someone's assertion and it's just not true.

__________________My Message to President-Elect Donald Trump:America did NOT became great because of what government did. America became great because of what the U.S. Constitution prevented our government from doing. The people made America great.

Unlike the "United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which is government-sponsored, politically motivated, and predisposed to believing that climate change is a problem in need of a U.N. solution," [/B]NIPCC "has no formal attachment to or sponsorship from any government or governmental agency" and is "wholly independent of political pressures and influences and therefore is not predisposed to produce politically motivated conclusions or policy recommendations."

The NIPCC is part of the Heartland Institute which is about as politically as it gets.

You still don't get what I mean by political do you? I mean a govt solution via the UN as the governing body. Plus scientists like to have jobs created for them by govts.

Geesh!

__________________My Message to President-Elect Donald Trump:America did NOT became great because of what government did. America became great because of what the U.S. Constitution prevented our government from doing. The people made America great.

Laugh all you want, but you're side is trying to put the kabosh on any speech that disagrees with the alarmists on GW.

__________________My Message to President-Elect Donald Trump:America did NOT became great because of what government did. America became great because of what the U.S. Constitution prevented our government from doing. The people made America great.